Doom 3 mini review

[Demolition Man]

I didn't know where to put this on here but I thought I'd give you all a quick review on Doom 3 since its "the most ancitipated game until Halo 2 comes out!" :lol: My review is just based on the single player game, I won't even bother reviewing the multiplayer aspect since 99% of the people playing are the type that will kill "noobs" like me in 3 seconds upon entering the room. :lol:

Storyline: Yes, there is a storyline in this game. You are a marine with no name who goes to Mars, and suddenly the Mars base gets invaded by demons from hell and so on and so forth. Wait.. wasn't that the story to every other Doom game so far? Well okay so Doom 1 didn't have a real progessive storyline like Doom 3 does, but does that really matter? No, not really. Any semblence of a storyline in Doom 3 is very faint, at best its anorexic and at worst its borderline non-exsistant. But anyways you get where I am getting to so enough on that.

Graphics: I will admit one thing, the graphics on Doom 3 are pretty good. While its nothing really revolutionary like some people hype the game to be, I don't see anything here that I haven't seen done in the past few years. Doom 3's biggest strength however lies in how well the atmosphere is used in the game. Much like the previous games, stuff like lighting really adds to the game. I'll give credit where it is due, Doom 3 does a good job at that.

Sounds: The soundtrack is very film like, which helps out a LOT in certain spots where you feel nervous because there might be a monster that could come up from behind you any second. Sound effects is nothing more than the typical stuff we have heard for many years on FPS games.

Gameplay: Now to the important area.. the gameplay. To sum it up.. if you have played Doom 1 even then you know EXACTLY what to expect here. For those who have NOT (and who hasn't on here), here is a summary of what Doom in general is like. You enter a room, you see a bunch of baddies so you kill them. Now you see two doors, and one needs a key. So you go in the door that can be opened, and find more baddies. You kill them, go up some ledge, through a passage, get a key, go back to the locked door, repeat the whole process a few times then finally reach the Exit which takes you to the next level.. only to repeat the process again.

Now I'll be honest there is a few minor differences in the process in Doom 3, but its not that much different. Instead of keys in Doom 3, you have to collect Person's IDs in order to be able to open some of the doors while other doors will open after you complete tasks. But in the end, its still the same as Doom 1.

Difficulty: At least a good week's worth of gaming for any average gamer.

Overall: I'll admit the visual presentation on Doom 3 is very well done, the soundtrack really enhances that. But then I'm reminded that in the end this is nothing more than a very glossy remake of the original Doom, which isn't bad but considering how many FPS games that are on the market I feel that Doom 3 really isn't needed. There is nothing here gameplay wise that is new. So unless you got the hardware to play this game on, which is beyond vogue to me then you aren't missing out of anything really. Even if you do, hold off for a bit before buying Doom 3. I have a feeling that within a year it will be in the discount bin, if not close to it.

Hope you liked my review, its not the most indepth review but I feel that its good enough to give everyone a good idea on if Doom 3 is really up to the hype. To me I don't feel that Doom 3 is worth even a fourth of the hype its getting, there are much better games out there that to me need more hype than what Doom 3 is getting.

Okay, I'll quit ranting. After all, if I go on any further I might offend Generation Gimmie. :shock:

[Shane R. Monroe]

I won't discuss it directly, but there is a certain monthly radio show you should tune into if you want my feelings on Doom 3.

I installed it on my system. Granted, my video card ain't exactly tomorrow's unit (i.e. didn't cost $500). Using LOW QUALITY, 640x480 (in fact, letting the system choose the parameters) - I got about 5-8fps. This is a P4, 2.26 with 512MB of RAM and an MX4 card.

Now, I'm TOLD that I could get "acceptable" speed if I went into ADVANCED settings and started turning everything off. But then, we're back to P&S vs WIDESCREEN. ID intended this game to be seen with these features on - and since I can't play it without a SUBSTANTIAL investment, I'm simply going to ignore it and NOT recommend it to others.

There is NO GAME ON THE PLANET worth $500+ to play. Not D3... Not Half Life 2 ... No ... simply doesn't exist.

DOOM3 feels like a MARKETING TOOL FOR NVIDIA. I'd be willing to bet that if you did the research, you would find that NVIDIA paid substantial amounts for Doom 3's development.

[Demolition Man]

Shane, make sure you are running the latest drives for your graphics card. I updated my ATI Radeon 9600 to the 4.9 Beta drivers (was previously running 4.7) and I noticed a nice improvement on the frame rate.

Not to mention I was able to go from Low to Medium settings and from 640x480 to 800x600.

[Shane R. Monroe]

Oh I had the latest ... absolutely ... Didn't matter :(

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

The hype around Doom 3 was that it was going to be awesome and revolutionize game play.

I never read any where how it was going to do that (like all other games released in the past 4 years). I figured we hit a wall with FPS about 4 years ago. What are we really waiting for as far as the next plateau is concerned with FPS? What would die hard FPS players like to see?

I don't get the draw or the desire to buy a $500 video card that will cost about $99 in 3 years.

Shrug..i really dont get it

[Shane R. Monroe]

http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/02/technology/doom3/index.htm?cnn=yes

Pretty much sums it up:

1) People are stupid enough to spend $500 to play a video game.
2) NVidia probably paid millions to be "recommended card of choice".
3) Tech demos are now more important than fresh, new game play
4) People are stupid enough to be 'scared' by a video game.

Anyone else get anything from this article?

[Dragon57]

Nope, you pretty much summed it up.

The way I see it, a lot of people today do not enjoy life and look to alternatives like video games and FPS to loose themselves in. People also like to spend money and look for a reason to justify buying that $500 video card. I see it in a lot of my friends. They will not run out and get the $500 video card when released, but they will go get it without batting an eye when the first game that can benefit from it comes out.

When I see coverage of a buying frenzy like Doom 3 has brought about, all I can think of is my old Amiga Lemmings game. :)

[bradhig]

My fond memory of Doom and Doom2 was turning bad guy against bad guy and letting them sort it out.

[rolisme]

Wow Shane. I am surprised you get so poor performance. I am running a P4 2.4ghz (without hyperthreading), 1 gig of ram, a GeForce TI4200, Soundblaster Audigy 2 (gotta love DVD-Audio), and Windows XP Pro. I run the game at 1280x1024 (an LCD monitor, anything other than that resolution looks horrible), the graphics set to high and no anti-aliasing and the game runs very well. I don't know how many FPS (can some one tell me how I can see the FPS for the game?) but it is very playable. I was surprised at how well it runs as from what I heard on the internet I didn't think I would get it to run very well at all. When I set the graphics to very high the game is still playable, but does get choppy in many parts so I play with high graphics.

One thing I noticed was that the game is a memory hog. I have a gig of ram and have my virtual memory set to 1.5 gigs (it is set that high because I use a program which has a huge memory leak in it) and when I close the game I have a windows message saying I am running low on virtual memory. I couldn't believe it. Is it just my system, or does the game really eat up that much memory?

As for the game play, I agree mostly with what Demolition Man said. I am not a big fan of the FPS type games, all though I do play them occasionally (I am a retro gaming fan, hence my presence here). The graphics are pretty good, I thought the sound was great, and the game play plays just like most of the other FPS games. I won't play multiplayer, even in the newbie rooms because I get my butt kicked so bad that I don't have fun playing the game (just like in most other online games) and I haven't beat the solo game yet. I like it, but it is definately not the game of the century like it is supposed to be (judging by the hype from the advertising and just the general online buzz I read on the internet).

[DaMenace]

Yea Doom 3 is in general not a bad game but it's not revolutionary..
I still find it fun but for something, well, that is revolutionary I'd say check out Far Cry..

Shane I thought I might try to help ya out here to get Doom3 to run better, check out this link:
http://ucguides.savagehelp.com/Doom3/FPSVisuals.htm

I hope that helps ya :-)

As for what I liked about Doom 3... well I liked the beginning of it and the part where you first fight the Hell Knights and the next level after the Hell Knights.. a large part of it felt kinda like 'filler'.. and there's just something that needs to be said about all these secret closets that just open up and a monster jumps out.. I can buy the portal stuff but all these secret closets (and in some cases a secret closet inside another secret closet?) is bit of a stretch....

[Shane R. Monroe]

Yeah, well ... I uninstalled it, so no worries about posting ways I can play it faster.

:)

[DaMenace]

ah man I'm trying to help ya out here Shane :-(

[yuckymucky]

I still find it fun but for something, well, that is revolutionary I'd say check out Far Cry..


You can't be serious? You would have to be the first person ever to say that. There is nothing revolutionary about that game at all.

[Demolition Man]

Anyone who has access to newsgroups should go check out alt.games.doom right now. Its hillarious how many "fanboys" are now bitching about how its "unoriginal" and "the same thing as Doom 1 and 2."

Didn't I say on multiple occasions myself that D3 was going to be nothing new? Shane certainly did, but I knew all along when I saw the first screen shots and even got ahold of the alpha demo that it was nothing new.

I love it when I'm right and I can laugh at all the "fanboys" who complain about what I was saying from the beginning. :lol:

[Shane R. Monroe]

We'll see how many $500 video cards get returned....

[metrokard3]

I loved doom 3......I was happy with what i got. I just went over to my friends house who just bought a new computer and beat the game at his place...So i didnt pay for jack!

[Nectar]

installed it on my system. Granted, my video card ain't exactly tomorrow's unit (i.e. didn't cost $500). Using LOW QUALITY, 640x480 (in fact, letting the system choose the parameters) - I got about 5-8fps. This is a P4, 2.26 with 512MB of RAM and an MX4 card.

Well, Carmack did say "Do not buy a GeForce4-MX for Doom 3" so there ya go. (Not as if I'm saying you bought it for Doom 3 but ... yeah) Even a GeForce 3 is supposed to outperform them on this game.

[Darksol]

installed it on my system. Granted, my video card ain't exactly tomorrow's unit (i.e. didn't cost $500). Using LOW QUALITY, 640x480 (in fact, letting the system choose the parameters) - I got about 5-8fps. This is a P4, 2.26 with 512MB of RAM and an MX4 card.

Well, Carmack did say "Do not buy a GeForce4-MX for Doom 3" so there ya go. (Not as if I'm saying you bought it for Doom 3 but ... yeah) Even a GeForce 3 is supposed to outperform them on this game.

From the beginning , Carmack said a Geforce3 line was the minimum. The Geforce 4 MX still for all intents and purposes is a Geforce 2 . Blame Nvidia for the marketing on that card. At least Carmack was upfront to begin with regarding the system requirements.

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

For the record, Shanes Geforce card came with his machine.

He would never buy a video card to play a game.

[Darksol]

For the record, Shanes Geforce card came with his machine.

He would never buy a video card to play a game.

Buying a video card for one game ( especially a $500 ) is a little out of control. But if my video card was 2 years or older , I would consider it. Not only to play the new games, but to play the ones that were 2 years old even better.

To meet the minimum spec ( Geforce 3 ) you could pick up a card for less than a hundred.

Yes, there is the principle, but then there is the reality also.

I have played both Doom 1 and Doom 2. I knew Doom 3 would offer nothing new in gameplay and accepted it would only have better graphics and sound. I did not think this game would herald the coming of some deity or some revolutionary new gameplay like some people might have thought. This game is a very good graphics and sound demo of games to come. Nothing more and probably nothing less.

If you can live with that, then the game is pretty good.

Does that sound like blasphemy from a guy who is going to CGE in 1 1/2 weeks :) ?

[Demolition Man]

For the record, Shanes Geforce card came with his machine.

He would never buy a video card to play a game.

For the record myself my box came with a craptascular GeForce 2 that tied up 64 megs of my system RAM. That is the MAJOR reason why I upgraded my card to the ATI Radeon 9600 (besides wanting to add TV out to my box). I wasn't even concerned about how Doom 3 was going to run, actually the only game I cared about how well it ran at the time was Freelancer - which yes got a HUGE improvement on the 9600. :D

But yeah, with the rate video cards are droping one can get even a decent 9600 at a fairly good price these days. I only payed about $120 for mine at the time, newegg.com is selling the ASUS version for $80.99 which reading the specs is nearly identical to my ATI one. :)

[Darksol]

For the record, Shanes Geforce card came with his machine.

He would never buy a video card to play a game.

For the record myself my box came with a craptascular GeForce 2 that tied up 64 megs of my system RAM. That is the MAJOR reason why I upgraded my card to the ATI Radeon 9600 (besides wanting to add TV out to my box). I wasn't even concerned about how Doom 3 was going to run, actually the only game I cared about how well it ran at the time was Freelancer - which yes got a HUGE improvement on the 9600. :D

But yeah, with the rate video cards are droping one can get even a decent 9600 at a fairly good price these days. I only payed about $120 for mine at the time, newegg.com is selling the ASUS version for $80.99 which reading the specs is nearly identical to my ATI one. :)

Even when I was a poor high school student, I was willing to shell out between $150-$250 for a video card. I appreciate good gameplay as much as anyone else who remembers what it was, but the day I put in a Voodoo 2 3D accelerator to play that new game 'Unreal' was awesome.

Overall a video card should represent a certain percentage of the total money you put into the machine. I won't down or attack someone who spent $500 on a video card for a 3-4 thousand dollar computer. If they have the disposable income to it, then that is their right. Seeing Joe Sixpack putting a 500 video card into a 500-600 dollar E-machine would indeed by hilarious.

[Shane R. Monroe]

My problem is..

its TOTALLY apparent that this game is 100% tied to the video card. This smells like a marketing cross promotion situation.

"We didn't bother to make the game anything new - but you'll need a new video card".

Doesn't this bother anyone else?

"The only thing new about this game is the video card you'll need to install to play it" - Shane R. Monroe.

I just spent what I consider an EXTREME amount of money on my whitebox. I just put a $150 hardware encoder card in it for capping TV. Capping TV is pretty much my biggest passion these days. Its a hobby, has long term potential - serving me HUNDREDS of hours of entertainment. I still didn't want to plunk down what I consider that much money. To pay $180-$500 for a card that will essentially end up backing 2 games at 25-30 hours of play makes NO SENSE TO ME. Again, I talked about this at length on my show. Do the math. Its costing you a fortune to play Doom III + Half Life II if you have to make a significant investment.

The last time I made any investment on a video card was a 3DFX in-series card to compliment my Matrox MM200. Graphics really mean that little to me.

[Demolition Man]

Shane you pretty much nailed it there. Now while I'm enjoying Doom 3 on my setup, any upgrades I have done to my box wasn't done for Doom 3 but rather for giving my system a more whitebox likeness to it, and to get rid of the one crippling feature that is on the motherboard (the GeForce 2 hogging my system RAM). I don't need to have the greatest graphics in a game, or the highest resolution either - just as long as the gameplay is good. Doom 3 is not original, yet its good enough to keep one busy. But give me Pac Man any day over Doom 3 kthks.

I certainly agree with you Shane on your recent addition of the WinTV PVR250, as I'm heavily considering it now. While I have seen reviews of it before, its hard to know how far to trust a review these days on any given product since for all we know the company itself could of slid the reviewer some stuff under the table in order to get a more favorable review. Between that and some of the review I see on stuff really biased/ignorant (like how some PC hardware reviews get bad marks simply because the stupid end user has no clue that their box is USB 1.1 and they are trying to use a USB 2.0 only product on it).

This certainly has gotten a bit away from what the original post was about, but in a way the amount of discussion this has brought has been great. :D

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

To put this back on topic...

You guys are funny

While everyone is pissing and moaning over Doom3 and needing a new graphics card (i don't give a damn if you paid $50 to get a new video card, you did it to play SOMETHING!) I have been using the same hardware for the past 2 years.

A nice craptacular Geforce2 MX 400 64mb of RAM on a AMD 1600+ with 512mb of RAM.

Last FPS or anything needing 3d acclerated graphics, GTA: Vice City (which got moved to the whitebox, and that has a ATI something or another tv out card, as you can see I don't even give 2 shits about what video card i have). My main box used to be for playing MAME (I have a dedicated MAME cab for that) now its just for playing simple games and games i've coded myself.

This box is for encoding movies and making music. And before you wonder what I am using to make music with, Acid 2.0 on a PCI SB16!

I don't get the itch to upgrade my pc like others do or my software unless a really signifigant change has been made to the software to make my life easier (I always tease Shane that hes addicted to upgrades)

To me, some software companies get it right and all the upgrades are to justify you paying for the product again (since they usually stick something in and break 10 other things that worked before kthxWinDVR). It really does take a act of God to get me to upgrade certain software (case and point, i would never run anything above Acid 2.0 becausee I've seen it crash while in the middle of working on a tune and me lose EVERYTHING!).

But hey..I've always been the freak and weirdo of the crowd. :)

[Darksol]

Bryan,

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using stable software.

From a hardware point I admit, there is one time I regret upgrading a video card and that was when this new video card seemed to not care about VESA compatibility. I guess there really isn't a reason to now adays but there are plenty of old DOS only games that I still like to play.

The one thing that people didn't like in Doom 3 was how you had to hold the flashlight and weapon separate (especially in such a dark game). Then some guy created the duct tape mod to tape the flashlight to the weapon using duct tape. It will be interesting to see what mods come from the dev tools ?

[Demolition Man]

I've running a very simular system to you Bryan, except my AMD is the 1.7 gigahertz processor (forgot its model number) and of course the ATI Radeon 9600 (which gave me back 64 megs of system RAM). As far as music software, I use Fruity Loops for the most part. Great flexability, and only gets better with the right VSTi plugins. Some plugins however are complete memory hogs, but the sound quality is unreal.

I haven't had many problems with Acid 4.0 btw. Just save your work often and you won't have any problems. Tho I'll admit 2.0 is still great. :D

[WorknMan]

"The only thing new about this game is the video card you'll need to install to play it" - Shane R. Monroe.

Good point. But on the other hand, this is Doom. If you buy a Doom game, you pretty much know what to expect, and I hear that Doom 3 does it well. I don't really care about the game myself, but I don't understand all the bitching going on about needing bigger iron to play this game. It's been awhile since we've seen this happen, but I can recall back in the olden days trying to run the PC version of Mortal Kombat 2 on a 386, and doing a lot of cussing in the process :)

I honestly couldn't look down upon anyone who's ever upgraded hardware to play a particular game, since I upgraded to a P233 for the specific purpose of playing Spy Hunter in MAME at 60fps. Not that I was really crazy about the game, just that I was pissed cuz I couldn't run it at full speed :)

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

I haven't had many problems with Acid 4.0 btw. Just save your work often and you won't have any problems. Tho I'll admit 2.0 is still great. :D
Acid 4.0 was the version of Acid i was speaking about crashing. I patched it all the way up to the d revision before going back to the must faster and stable 2.0

All I ever wanted was a multi-track loop recording program. That beat matching and chopping shit is probably whats fuck -ing everything up.

[Demolition Man]

Strange Bryan, as I have never had those problems before. Then again, from what it sounds like 2.0 is doing what you need it to do so no needs to worry. :)

My needs are a bit more... bigger tho as I'm in the midst of working on a full album. Therefore, stuff like chopping does help me out at times (like doing a chopper effect on a vocal). :D

[Shane R. Monroe]

<I>"The only thing new about this game is the video card you'll need to install to play it" - Shane R. Monroe. </I>

Good point. But on the other hand, this is Doom. If you buy a Doom game, you pretty much know what to expect, and I hear that Doom 3 does it well. I don't really care about the game myself, but I don't understand all the bitching going on about needing bigger iron to play this game. It's been awhile since we've seen this happen, but I can recall back in the olden days trying to run the PC version of Mortal Kombat 2 on a 386, and doing a lot of cussing in the process :)

I honestly couldn't look down upon anyone who's ever upgraded hardware to play a particular game, since I upgraded to a P233 for the specific purpose of playing Spy Hunter in MAME at 60fps. Not that I was really crazy about the game, just that I was pissed cuz I couldn't run it at full speed :)

Then let's not try to promote it as being the be all end all of innovative video games. Maybe a little truth in advertising would have made me LESS sour to this release.

As for upgrading hardware ...

If you can justify $500 for a video card OUTSIDE of playing a single, $50 game - then by all means. When you upgraded to play Spy Hunter, you got a bonus - your whole system ran better, faster, and you received numerous other benefits. To spend that kind of cash for what is essentially a single game ... sorry ... still can't buy in.

[Demolition Man]

It is pathetic how some people justify paying $500 just to buy a video card upgrade just so they can play a game. These are the same people that probably justify spending over $100 per month on a cellphone just so they can yack about irrelevant crap at the grocery store so everyone in the world can hear about how their Uncle Bob's affair with Lucy Butler is ruining his marrage to Aunt Jane.

That's just how bad our society and their idea of what important is. Sad but true. :x

[Darksol]

It is pathetic how some people justify paying $500 just to buy a video card upgrade just so they can play a game. These are the same people that probably justify spending over $100 per month on a cellphone just so they can yack about irrelevant crap at the grocery store so everyone in the world can hear about how their Uncle Bob's affair with Lucy Butler is ruining his marrage to Aunt Jane.

That's just how bad our society and their idea of what important is. Sad but true. :x

These days , buying the highest end Geforce or ATI card right now to do 3D gaming for one game is kinda nuts. However think about where we are going.
With Longhorn and other Explorer replacements coming out that are essentially ( even if the desktop looks the same , it will be a 3D engine simulating a 2D look and feel ) 3D hardware accelerated , having a good 3D accelarator will become a requirement and not just a recommendation. Imagine your desktop being sluggish now because your 3D acceleration isn't good enough :)

[Shane R. Monroe]

Another reason to stay with XP or migrate to another platform...I can't see Longhorn in my future anyway...

[Darksol]

Mac OS X right now requires 3D acceleration and will require a lot more in the future. There are a few projects ( One by Sun Microsystems in fact ) that will bring a 3D desktop to Linux. Longhorn wants to do the same.

The craze to bring out 3D desktops has failed before, but now there is enough momentum that this time it will succeed.

Where exactly are you going to go ?

I don't see this as a doomdays scenario for upgrading video cards because the businesses will realize that their GUIs will have to work with the lowest common denominator ( You can thank existing business customers for that win).

[Demolition Man]

Great, so now we need 3D graphics that have icons that dance and sing in order to get Joe Six Pack to buy a new system now? Its bad enough that we have to deal with the stupidity that is already out there (including them bragging about how great Doom 3 is), but now we're going to keep going lower and lower on the stupidity scale. I fear that the human race is close to being Amused To Death here folks (no puns intended to the classic album by Roger Waters which I highly recommend btw).

I shouldn't be shocked tho, look at how MP3 has now suddenly become a household name despite the fact that most people who use it don't even know what MP3 stands for or how it really works even. Hell, most of my coworkers don't know either so why am I surprised. :shock:

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

I shouldn't be shocked tho, look at how MP3 has now suddenly become a household name despite the fact that most people who use it don't even know what MP3 stands for or how it really works even. Hell, most of my coworkers don't know either so why am I surprised. :shock:
What amazes me the most is the success of MP3 players (especially iPods and car stereo MP3 players). Howard Stern uses a iPod and he straight up said he had to have someone program it or him for him to use it. Fuck that!

To me, MP3 devices should not be successful at all and be a niche market. Why? Because you actually have to know a little something to know how to either

1) Rip a CD and convert it to the MP3 format, burn it to CD or upload it to your iPod or whatever mp3 player you might be using.

2) Know how to d/l music off of Kazaa (most machines that are a spyware nightmare are from people who have d/l Kazaa, didn't know what the fuck to do with it, and its like leaving your front door open after not figuring out how to close the door..all kinds of shit gets in)

3) Basic knowledge of burning ANY KIND of a cd. You'd be amazed at how many people have cd rom burners but have no clue how to burn a cd.

What we take for granted as something simple to do is actually considered "Advanced" computer knowledge by most people out there. So lets just say the majority of people buying MP3 players arent even using them :)

[Demolition Man]

Damn right Bryan. If this indicates how much of a household name MP3 has become, I was watching some comedy show on CBS not that long ago (forgot the name) and the plot of the one I was watching was about some parents kid who stole a MP3 player from a store. The show didn't just say MP3 once, they were throwing around the name MP3 in the same way people talk about the weather.

Its very funny how MP3 went from a "computer geek" thing to suddenly a trendy fashion flavor of the month thing overnight. Some people however will realize that MP3 is no replacement for true CD quality, and certainly will discover (like I have) the higher end formats like Super Audio CD. SACD is like a freakin drug... once you get hooked, you can't stop. :lol:

[YoshiM]

Boy, been a while since I posted here.

Read the thread, read the article. Gotta wonder: what's the beef? Brand spankin' new PC games requiring new hardware has been a standard for years. How are these days any different? Now it's video cards as opposed to the fastest processor.

Everyone's sense of values and "what's important" is different. Hey, if all the person does is sit down at their uber-machine and play CTF with a bunch of buddies online-more power to them and to them plopping 500 bones on a video card is worth it-especially since it will probably make their other games look and move a heckuva lot better. I'm sure the rest of the people who bought new video cards were already on the fence...Doom 3 was enough to push 'em over.

Personally, I wouldn't spend a lot of money on a video card. My last upgrade was in February after I replaced the GeForce 2 MX card with a GeForce FX5200 for $65. I don't need the resolution tweaked up to astronomical levels-I'm happy with lower resolutions. I've yet to play Doom 3 (waiting for a demo) but from what I've read my card will handle it and there are some tweaks to get the same "effect" (the shadowing) without bustin' the video card.

[Shane R. Monroe]

Here is why ...

ID has said .. .THIS IS DOOM WITH BETTER GRAPHICS.

So, you turn everything down .. you lose all the crap that supposedly seperates this from Doom I.

So, once again, I say ... You spend the $500, or you play Doom 1.

[YoshiM]

Here is why ...

ID has said .. .THIS IS DOOM WITH BETTER GRAPHICS.

So, you turn everything down .. you lose all the crap that supposedly seperates this from Doom I.

So, once again, I say ... You spend the $500, or you play Doom 1.

Oh, no doubt it's Doom with better graphics. What was anyone expecting, Something New (TM)?

As for the graphics-ID has stated that they wanted a large range of people and hardware to be able to play it and with a little tweaking (like turning anti-aliasing off and cranking up the resolution for example) it can be done.

As an example, the following shows what the game looks like with a $50 Radeon 8500 (if you can find one-average price) and a middle road PC:

http://www2.hardocp.com/1090787143TO62AMOEWX_4_16_l.jpg

Now even at Low Res, it looks a lot better than this:

http://www.mobygames.com/game/shots/p,2/gameId,1068/gameShotId,24661/

Play it however you want. If you enjoy the game with whatever system you have, then you played it the way Id wanted.

PS: check out HardOCP's article. They explain ways to trim off some of the effects and tweak the mundane stuff to give a similar effect but with less effort from your system.

http://www2.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjQ0LDM=